[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>>>>>>> What do you not get?  The reasoning is no different from Behe   
   claiming   
   >>>>>>>>>>> that some god is needed to create the flagellum.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> They obviously have other feelings   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> about what are not "established findings of modern science."   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> So what does it matter what they think about things outside of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> science, how is that contradicting science?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> They are claiming that their understanding of science can be made   
   to   
   >>>>>>>>>>> conform to their literal interpretations of the Bible.  It is the   
   same   
   >>>>>>>>>>> claim that the ID perps make except they agree that biological   
   evolution   
   >>>>>>>>>>> is a fact of nature.  Some of them still think like Behe.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Not only   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> that, but as I indicated there are somethings about evolution   
   that have   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> not been established because they claim to be tweekers like   
   Behe, and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> their god has been tweeking things in order to make humans into   
   his own   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> image.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm still waiting for an example of those tweekers. And why do you   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> keep bringing Behe into it? He has nothing to do with Biologos or   
   they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> with him. They actually have a lengthy article about his "Darwin's   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Black Box" book where they go through his arguments one by one and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> show how they don't stand up.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> How do you expect god to have made man in his own image without   
   >>>>>>>>>>> tweeking?  They likely even differ in what they think image means.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-can-evolu   
   ion-account-for-the-complexity-of-life-on-earth-today   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The example was in their description of what they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believed.  They believe that the Bible is the "inspired and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authroitative word of God" and "First, that God created all   
   things,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including human beings in his own image.".  You have to read   
   their web   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> site to learn that some of them are tweekers that claim that   
   their god   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was involved in guiding the evolution of life on earth.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have read their web site and I see nothing anywhere about   
   forcing   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> biological evolution into conforming with their   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biblical interpretation. Feel free to point it out if I have   
   missed   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> You must have missed the part about tweekers,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> It's a big site and I can't find anything about tweekers. Please   
   quote   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> what they actually say or at least point me to the actual part of   
   the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> site where they say it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>      From the link that I originally put up:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-is-biologo   
   -different-from-evolutionism-intelligent-design-and-creationism   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> BioLogos believes that science is limited to explaining the natural   
   >>>>>>>>>>> world, and that supernatural events like miracles are part of   
   reality too.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> END QUOTE:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> https://biologos.org/common-questions/what-is-evolutionary-creation   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> This comes after the quote about evolutionary creationism that I   
   >>>>>>>>>>> originally put up.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> QUOTE:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> We believe that God acts purposefully in creation, just as he does   
   in   
   >>>>>>>>>>> our lives, and that he continues to actively uphold and sustain   
   creation.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> END QUOTE:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Tweekers acting purposefully in creation that they include life as   
   part   
   >>>>>>>>>>> of the creation.  The reason to believe exIDiots also believe that   
   their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> god is still working on the creation.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> and the claims that their   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> god evolved humans in his own image.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> How does that contradict science?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> They do not have to contradict science, just make the same claims   
   about   
   >>>>>>>>>>> limits of natural processes that Behe does about the flagellum.    
   Like   
   >>>>>>>>>>> these guys Behe understands that evolution is a fact of nature,   
   but that   
   >>>>>>>>>>> doesn't stop him from his science denial attempts.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> You claimed that they trying to force biological evolution into   
   >>>>>>>>>> conforming with their Biblical interpretation but can't produce a   
   >>>>>>>>>> single example of that.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Why lie about something like that when you can just go up this post   
   and   
   >>>>>>>>> see the examples quoted out of the original links that I put up?   
   >>>>>>>>> Wanting to live in denial is no excuse for lying.  Made in his own   
   image   
   >>>>>>>>> is a Biblical interpretation, and they claim that biological   
   evolution   
   >>>>>>>>> was used to do that.  It is no different from Behe claiming that his   
   god   
   >>>>>>>>> was responsible for creating the flagellum in an evolutionary   
   context.   
   >>>>>>>>> There is no evidence that some god used evolution to do any such   
   thing.   
   >>>>>>>>> They have no other means than Beheian science denial to support any   
   god   
   >>>>>>>>> involvement in the evolution of humans in any specific way.  There   
   is no   
   >>>>>>>>> scientific evidence that humans evolved to be what they are due to   
   the   
   >>>>>>>>> influence of some god.  If they believe that there is, they are in   
   the   
   >>>>>>>>> same category of science denial as Behe.  What do the other quotes   
   tell   
   >>>>>>>>> you about their adherence with literal Biblical interpretations.    
   Behe   
   >>>>>>>>> lies about why he puts up his denial, but these guys say straight out   
   >>>>>>>>> that they believe what they believe because the Bible tells them so.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> You still can't give even a single example of the things you have   
   >>>>>>>> accused them of. QED   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Why do you insist on continuing to lie.  The examples were given and   
   are   
   >>>>>>> still in this post.  I took the quotes right out of the links that I   
   >>>>>>> gave to start this thread.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You are the one who is telling lies, there are no examples in what you   
   >>>>>> quoted. You could simply prove me wrong by requoting the examples but   
   >>>>>> you cannot because they do not exist. Beats me why you continue to   
   >>>>>> make an idiot of yourself by claiming something exists when it doesn't   
   >>>>>> and people can see that.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You should not keep lying.  You ignored the material that I quoted.  You   
   >>>>> didn't have to find it, just confirm that those quotes came from the   
   >>>>> material that you were lying about.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Just go back up the post and lie where the quotes were put up.  You   
   >>>>> could not do that before, and you likely can't do it now because you   
   >>>>> can't face how you have been lying.  Why would I have to requote what   
   >>>>> you know that you are lying about, and the quotes still exist in this   
   post?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You can't requote it because there is nothing there denying that   
   >>>> natural mechanisms were involved in evolution or that they support   
   >>>> tweaking.   
   >>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)